while i agree that AS saved Futurama, and grew it, it was not Comedy Central that took them away, as far as I know. They lost that contract well before CC got the show and additional episodes were ordered.

Futurama is one of the best animated shows ever made, and ya shouldn’t miss it…

Clearly, someone on the writing staff is pretty familiar with the anti-evolution shtick.

The episode was replete with an creationist orangutan arguing gap theory, and a cameo by an incredulous Flying Spaghetti Monster arguing that there was no way that he evolved from a simpler, ground based, plate of rigatoni,and an impassioned speech by a Sarah Palin type who declares “I don’t understand evolution and I want to protect my children from understanding it. Down with the thinkers!!”

stevaroni said:
Clearly, someone on the writing staff is pretty familiar with the anti-evolution shtick.

I can assure you, writers for shows like the Simpsons and Futurama are normally ivy league, typically Harvard. Futurama especially has several holders of physics/math degrees turned writers. Quite a serious nerd staff who follow developments of evolution, climate change and Quantum theory

Not really. I stopped being interested in it because every show became a social commentary. The “who are we better than this week” shtick got old and boring. Give me Squidbillies over South Park any day.

The reason that the new Futurama episodes aren’t good has nothing to do with the brand name ‘Comedy Central’ or ‘Adult Swim’. There is a completely noticeable difference in the writing now. Comedy Central seems to be pumping their “Drawn Together” / “Ugly Americans” hack writers into the veins of a once great show. Those two shows were horrible, and made all jokes both overly explained, and overly predictable. I really want to like the new episodes, but I just don’t.

Unfortunately, for those of us who are not USAnians, all we get is a black box saying “Sorry, Videos are not currently available in your country.”

rossum

YouTube has become notorious for censoring videos under the bogus guise of copyright infringement. If anyone makes a copyright claim about a video that is made, it is often pulled without allowing the maker of the video to defend himself. That’s not a logical legal standard at all, but tyranny.

Dale Husband said:
YouTube has become notorious for censoring videos under the bogus guise of copyright infringement.

Except that this isn’t YouTube, it’s an official preview hosted directly by Comedy Central.

In any case, I can see it just fine, and I’m nowhere near North America. Not only that, I tried setting myself up through various proxy servers around the world and had no trouble from any country I tried, including places like Turkey and Egypt. I’m curious to know what countries are being blocked.

The reason that the new Futurama episodes aren’t good has nothing to do with the brand name ‘Comedy Central’ or ‘Adult Swim’. There is a completely noticeable difference in the writing now. Comedy Central seems to be pumping their “Drawn Together” / “Ugly Americans” hack writers into the veins of a once great show. Those two shows were horrible, and made all jokes both overly explained, and overly predictable. I really want to like the new episodes, but I just don’t.

Good night sweet prince.

Unfortunately, the above poster did not do the research I’d expect of most readers of this site.

Note, that the writers, including several staff writers from FOX, are also writers of various other programs, include award-winning 30Rock and Simpsons. They authors below include writers on several award-winning or acclaimed episodes (such as “Where No Fan Has Gone Before” and “The Devil’s Hands are Idle Playthings”) and shows consistency throm throughout the series, with much the writing done by Matt Groening and David Cohen themselves.

Don’t you like South Park? I’d rather have South Park on Adult Swim and Futurama on Comedy Central.

Comedy Central constantly restrains South Park from it’s creators’ creativity. Adult Swim is one of the last bastions of freedom within corporate cable. Metalocalypse, Venture Brothers, and Robot Chicken, Sea Lab… All awesome in my book. Even if you don’t like them, at least they’re original.

Unfortunately, for those of us who are not USAnians, all we get is a black box saying “Sorry, Videos are not currently available in your country.”

rossum

YouTube has become notorious for censoring videos under the bogus guise of copyright infringement. If anyone makes a copyright claim about a video that is made, it is often pulled without allowing the maker of the video to defend himself. That’s not a logical legal standard at all, but tyranny.

It may not be logical, but it is a legal standard. It’s what sites like Youtube are required to do under the DMCA.

Clearly, someone on the writing staff is pretty familiar with the anti-evolution shtick.

The episode was replete with an creationist orangutan arguing gap theory, and a cameo by an incredulous Flying Spaghetti Monster arguing that there was no way that he evolved from a simpler, ground based, plate of rigatoni,and an impassioned speech by a Sarah Palin type who declares “I don’t understand evolution and I want to protect my children from understanding it. Down with the thinkers!!”

Maybe it was written somewhere on this blog but i missed the actual title of this episode or episode number so i can watch out for it. I missed it on the first run, but maybe tivo can catch it on the re-runs.

Maybe it was written somewhere on this blog but i missed the actual title of this episode or episode number so i can watch out for it. I missed it on the first run, but maybe tivo can catch it on the re-runs.

Really? You boycotted watching a great show because of what network it’s on? So you’re willing to let it die another death just because it’s not on the now-horrible Adult Swim? AS was great back in the day, but don’t f*ck up a great show by boycotting it being on a now better network.

Evolution is as real as the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Great imagination.

Yawn… So, Henry, same question as last time. Ya bring any actual evidence this time or did you just drop in again to whine?

I have a question for you. When do you think science will extend man’s lifespan to 1000 years, surpassing the 900 + years described in Genesis?

Probably never, but so what? Unlike you, we beleive in Truth in Advertising, so we do not claim science is either infallible or omnipotent. But its track record is still more reliable than religious mythology.

You let henry slip a lie past you. Those ages are not “described” in Genesis - they are only given, or claimed, or noted. No details whatsoever are mentioned. No cause is given. There is never the slightest attempt at describing what a man was like who lived twice, thrice, four times a human lifespan. Enormous age was considered an unalloyed blessing, proof of the favour of God.

The Greeks were wiser. Their story was of Gerontius, who requested eternal life of the gods, and was granted it. But he had asked for life, not youth, and so he got older, and older, and older, and older, in pain, infirmity and misery, and could not die.

Fundies today try to pretend that the reasons for the lifespans claimed for the patriarchs in Genesis are any but the most probable one - that those stories about legendary figures claimed those ages simply to emphasise how much greater the heroes were than the humans of their own day. Most likely nobody ever took it literally, before the fundies themselves.

The Greeks were wiser. Their story was of Gerontius, who requested eternal life of the gods, and was granted it. But he had asked for life, not youth, and so he got older, and older, and older, and older, in pain, infirmity and misery, and could not die.

You got it right on the Genesis part. I’m wondering about Gerontius. I’ve never heard of him, although his name, “Old Man,” would be an appropriate one. Do you have a source for the myth? It sounds like that of Tithonus, the lover of the Dawn goddess Eos. She asked Zeus to grant him eternal life, with the same results.

You let henry slip a lie past you. Those ages are not “described” in Genesis - they are only given, or claimed, or noted. No details whatsoever are mentioned. No cause is given. There is never the slightest attempt at describing what a man was like who lived twice, thrice, four times a human lifespan. Enormous age was considered an unalloyed blessing, proof of the favour of God.

The Greeks were wiser. Their story was of Gerontius, who requested eternal life of the gods, and was granted it. But he had asked for life, not youth, and so he got older, and older, and older, and older, in pain, infirmity and misery, and could not die.

Fundies today try to pretend that the reasons for the lifespans claimed for the patriarchs in Genesis are any but the most probable one - that those stories about legendary figures claimed those ages simply to emphasise how much greater the heroes were than the humans of their own day. Most likely nobody ever took it literally, before the fundies themselves.

According to my calculations, for 1556 years, 6 men were noted living past 900 years prior to the Flood. Noah was the only one who lived past 900 years after the Flood.

Noah’s son Shem lived 600 years, but the lifespans rapidly decreased. After two centuries, the lifespans were reduced to 200 years.

According to Genesis, the environment was radically changed so that it was no longer possible to live 900 + years. Maybe, if scientists can reproduce that same environment, we can have very long lifespans again.

According to my calculations, for 1556 years, 6 men were noted living past 900 years prior to the Flood. Noah was the only one who lived past 900 years after the Flood.

Noah’s son Shem lived 600 years, but the lifespans rapidly decreased. After two centuries, the lifespans were reduced to 200 years.

According to Genesis, the environment was radically changed so that it was no longer possible to live 900 + years. Maybe, if scientists can reproduce that same environment, we can have very long lifespans again.

henry said:
According to Genesis, the environment was radically changed so that it was no longer possible to live 900 + years. Maybe, if scientists can reproduce that same environment, we can have very long lifespans again.

No, we scientists don’t believe your hypothesis. We don’t think it even has value as a line of inquiry. If, OTOH, you really honestly do, put your money where your mouth is and test it yourself. Stick yourself or your kids in a high pressure chamber for the next 30 years and see if it slows the rate at which you age. Heck, do it with a lab rat. Or some fruit flies. Or an e coli colony.

But the point is, test your own hypothesis before you expect anyone else to buy it. That’s the way science works, and you don’t get a pass on it. If you want people to pay attention to your idea, you have to do some of the ground work. No one’s going to do it for you and no one’s going to include your claptrap in a science class until you do.

henry said:
According to Genesis, the environment was radically changed so that it was no longer possible to live 900 + years. Maybe, if scientists can reproduce that same environment, we can have very long lifespans again.

Maybe the years were just very, very short back then.

By the way, when Ussher ran his calculations did he correct for the phenomenally long lifespans of yore?